Infrastructure Engineering - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5
-
ItemAre SDIs serving the needs of local planning?: case studies of Victoria, Australia and Illinois, USA( 2001)National spatial data infrastructures (SDI) have been initiated and built throughout 1990s in both Australia and the U.S., initiated and coordinated by the Australia New Zealand Land Information Council (ANZLIC) and the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC), respectively. Numerous SDI-related activities at the national, state, and local level in both countries share similar core objectives, which are to stimulate coordinated collection, dissemination, and use of spatial data by public and private entities. This coordination is to result in digital databases that would be easily accessible and seamless across administrative and organizational boundaries and that would help secure social, environmental, and economic benefits to the involved communities. The improved information resources at the local level in particular are expected to contribute to sustainable urban development and to enhance the cooperation between government and nongovernment sectors. This paper raises the question about the actual effectiveness of the existing SDI developments and about the outcomes of the related interactions between the local, state, and national levels. Case study of local governments in Victoria, Australia and Illinois, U.S. are used to evaluate the utility of existing SDIs to local planning activities and to offer recommendations for increasing their effectiveness in supporting sustainable development.
-
ItemSpatial data infrastructure frameworks to support decision-making for sustainable development(Geography Institute of Colombia, 2001)
-
ItemLand administration and spatial data infrastructures: trends and developments( 2001)Historically, the strength of a land surveyor lies in the ability to use and understand bothmeasurement science and land management, and to apply these skills in a wide range ofland related activities ranging from land development to environmental management. Inresponse to the theme of this conference "2001 - A Spatial Odyssey" it is appropriate toconsider how these skills have evolved and are evolving within the broad surveyingdiscipline.It is proposed that a major dimension of the measurement science skill is reflected in thegrowing importance of spatial data infrastructures (SDI) and the land related skills arereflected in the re-discovery that the role of land administration plays in serving economic,environmental and social priorities in society. While SDI play a much broader role thansupporting land administration, land administration could be considered a key driver in SDIevolution.The objective of this paper is to identify SDI and land administration trends anddevelopments by drawing on the research of past and current projects undertaken byresearchers in the Centre for SDI and Land Administration at The University of Melbourne.The paper identifies some new research areas being planned by the Centre.
-
ItemSDI development to support spatial decision-making( 2002)Improved economic, social and environmental decision-making are principal objectives for investing in the development of spatial data infrastructure (SDI) at all political and administrative levels. So much so, resolution 7 of the recent 5th Global Spatial Data Infrastructure (GSDI) conference in Cartagena, Colombia argued that the purpose of the GSDI is to improve the availability, accessibility, and applicability of spatial information for decision-making (GSDI 2001). Developing institutional support for decision-making that promotes and incorporates the availability and accessibility of spatial information therefore plays an important role in SDI implementation. From an institutional perspective the motivation for SDI implementation is driven by the impracticality of a single organisation producing and maintaining the wide variety of data and models needed to inform many decisions, which results in increased sharing of data, information, analytical, display and modelling tools. This is being seen particularly in the natural resource, environment and local government sectors in Australia (Feeney et al. 2002). These sectors are utilising a variety of institutional mechanisms in their development of spatial decision support capabilities, which are moving progressively towards models that support the development and availability of interoperable digital geographic data and technologies to support spatial decision-making at different levels and participation. The inclusion of technology support as part of developing SDIs has been recognised as essential to meeting the needs of the multi-disciplinary and multi-participant environments that characterise decision-making for sustainable development (Agenda21 1993, GSDI 2001, Rio+10 2002). Unless a diversity of decision support mechanisms are going to be incorporated more into decision processes many relevant and useful spatial datasets and technologies are not going to be used to their potential to support sustainable development. Government has a central role to play in developing infrastructure that supports the discovery, access and applications of spatial information and technologies for such decision support. This paper looks at a variety of institutional mechanisms, for supporting the decision process, being employed in SDI development in the natural resource and environmental sectors in Australia. The decision-making levels supported by these different mechanisms will be reviewed in terms of organisational decision-making and decision process theories, as well as the level of coordination between institutional approaches at the spatial data policy level. The paper will conclude with a discussion of the implications of the approaches to developing institutional support for decision-making, as part of SDI development, as well as a consideration of directions for SDI development in the future to support spatial decision-making.
-
ItemThe Cultural Aspects of Sharing and Dynamic Partnershipswithin an SDI Hierarchy( 2002)The need to create multi-participant, decision-supported environments to address the issues of sustainable development and improving the quality of life creates a growing need to organise data across disciplines and organisations through different forms of spatial data infrastructure (SDI). This infrastructure is fundamentally a concept about facilitation and coordination of the exchange and sharing of spatial data between stakeholders from different jurisdictional levels in the spatial data community. The concept is well explained as an integrated, multi-levelled hierarchy of interconnected SDIs based on partnerships at corporate, local, state/provincial, national, regional (multi-national) and global (GSDI) levels. The creation of such an infrastructure and understanding the role of dynamic partnerships within an SDI hierarchy are essential to develop any SDI initiative. This paper reviews the nature and concept of SDIs, including the SDI hierarchy, which has helped to build understanding about the importance of the relationships within different levels of SDI, to support the interactions and dynamic nature of partnerships between spatial data communities. The role that human nature plays in any endeavour based on interaction and sharing makes cultural and social factors within a business environment important to the acceptance of the SDI concept and its alignment with spatial industry objectives. Further, the importance of establishing a culture for sharing as well as understanding the dynamic partnerships necessary to support such a culture is highlighted, and three classes of factors influencing SDI development are identified. It is argued that the adoption and implementation of these factors and selection of a proper model for SDI development can assist SDI coordinating agencies to overcome the problem of low participation and speed up the progress in the development of SDI initiatives.